Jump to content

Xelgion

Member
  • Posts

    944
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Xelgion

  1. No. Even if it did "add" content like Alorael says, I would feel that companies who would do such a thing, and who would then pop up more and more "Buy our game!" messages to be completely counter-productive.

    Originally Posted By: New J

    Rather than envisioning companies taking more away, imagine them giving more but only for a while. Suppose that company X releases game Y. They don't want to give it away, so they create a demo containing only content C. With an eroding demo, they can instead include C plus eroding content E. After some time you only have C again, but you had E for a while. You are strictly gaining from the erosion model.

    Thing is, you're assuming two things.

     

    A) The company put "E" into the demo which they wouldn't of otherwise

    B) They don't erode content "C"

     

    If they erode content "C" you just feel more rushed when playing a game. When I am playing the demo for Geneforge, do I want the features of creations, spells, and dialogue to appear as I go along the first few zones? By the time I was almost done with the demo, I would have about a minute of broken gameplay with then about 5 minutes of "Buy now!" messages popping up. And there are ways you can tantalize people without having the new content be seen, then erode away. For example, at the end of the G4 demo, you stop at the shaper town, and then it stops, you get all these lovely goodies and no one to use them on. For me, it was a great pull factor for me to buy the game. Heck, if Jeff really wanted to dangle sweet goodies in front of the player's mouth then snatch them away, he would of made it stop right before the new town, which as any player knows, always has new goodies of all sorts.

     

    But then take a look at erosion, the new content would be barely accessible, then dissipate, and then the base demo would start to dissipate as well, leaving gamers agitated and annoyed, especially with the frequent pop-ups. I would rather have a fully functional demo of Geneforge rather than have a demo of Geneforge which included a few more zones, but by the time you got to those zones, your characters creations, armor, and weapons all disappeared.

  2. The commercials this year seemed to be based around males in underwear. And lots of Budwiser, although not that many Honda commercials.

     

    Although the game was probably one of the best I have seen, and the Who's half-time performance was enjoyable, considering they are around 50 years old and still sound the same.

  3. @ Nioca and some other dude: It wouldn't of mattered. Looking back at the roles, I had no idea who anyone was (except Strine, who was doing his own thing), and a person who I thought was the pure spirit was the DL Commander. I got info from 2 sources that I thought were reliable. But no point in trying to make excuses, I think I just suck at NI.

  4. Originally Posted By: ☭
    Yeah, no kidding. "As long as I don't have to think about it, it's not wrong."

    Wrong. There is a difference between eating what has been dead and cannot be returned to life, and taking a life to eat.
  5. Originally Posted By: Sleeping Dragon
    That makes sense. People aren't going to like playing a game that they can't win. Winning is the American (and human) way!


    Its not necessarily winning. I do just fine on maps like Lord of the Rings custom maps (The ones with tactics, not just rpging) and Kerrigan's Demise (same concept), its just that singleplayer and campaigns add more than one objective (kill) which multiplayer does not provide when not using custom maps. It also provides a chance for people to screw around and see plausible tactics, good builds, and to just see how the game functions. Online has a competitiveness for obvious reasons that prevent that.
  6. Originally Posted By: Thuryl
    Originally Posted By: Xelgion
    Well Warcraft is essentially done for. I could not see Blizzard to even begin thinking of making Warcraft 4, considering they already have World of Warcraft. And I am very suspicious of StarCraft 2. I have a feeling that its gonna pull a Nova or be primarily multiplayer based, while singleplayer is underdeveloped or undersized.


    who the hell plays RTSes for singleplayer mode


    People who like Story, the ability to mess around and test out different things, and to not go against an insane person who memorized the best tactics and combo's in the first week of release. (And Alorael does, apparently.)
  7. Originally Posted By: Reality is not a toy.
    Which of their series have been going downhill rapidly? The only game that that even remotely seems to make sense for is World of Warcraft, and trying to argue that it's terrible just doesn't seem like a winning proposition. Those millions of customers apparently beg to differ.

    —Alorael, who happens to think Blizzard is one of the few companies that can be relied upon to produce good games. And to produce them months later than expected, but that's par for the course in game development.


    Well Warcraft is essentially done for. I could not see Blizzard to even begin thinking of making Warcraft 4, considering they already have World of Warcraft. And I am very suspicious of StarCraft 2. I have a feeling that its gonna pull a Nova or be primarily multiplayer based, while singleplayer is underdeveloped or undersized.
×
×
  • Create New...